Writing a school AI policy that teachers and students can follow

Students are already using AI tools for homework, whether or not the school has a policy. Many teachers use them too, for planning, writing examples and drafting letters. A policy that only bans AI won’t be followed. A policy that says nothing leaves every teacher to make up their own rules, which confuses students.

A useful policy is short, clear about what’s allowed, and focused on learning rather than on catching students out. Here is what it should cover.

Say what’s allowed, by task

A single school-wide rule rarely works, because AI helps in some tasks and undermines learning in others. A simple way to set rules is three levels that teachers apply to each task:

Teachers label each assignment with its level. Students always know where they stand.

Ask students to say how they used AI

When AI is allowed, ask students to add a short note: which tool they used, what they asked it, and what they changed. This is better than banning or detecting, because:

• It teaches students to be honest about their sources.
• It shows the teacher how the student worked.
• It turns a conversation about cheating into one about process.

Don’t rely on AI detectors

AI detection tools are not reliable enough to accuse a student of misconduct. They produce false positives, and students who write in a second language or a plain style can be flagged more often. OpenAI withdrew its own AI text classifier in 2023 because of its low accuracy.

If you suspect work isn’t a student’s own, do what you would do for any other concern: talk to the student about their work, ask them to explain their reasoning, and compare it with what they produce in class.

Change some assessments

If a task can be completed entirely by an AI tool at home, it no longer tells you what the student can do. That doesn’t mean abandoning homework. It means designing some assessments differently:

• More writing done in class, on paper or on locked-down devices.
• Assessing the process: plans, drafts and reflections, not only the final product.
• Short oral follow-ups, where students explain a piece of their work.
• Tasks connected to class discussions, local context or personal experience.

Protect student data

This is the part of the policy most often missed. Staff and students should not paste personal data into AI tools the school hasn’t approved. That includes names, grades, behaviour notes, special educational needs information and anything from the student information system.

• Check each tool’s terms for how it uses data you enter, and whether it trains on it.
• Check each tool’s minimum age. Many consumer AI tools are not intended for younger children, and some require parental consent for teenagers.
• Prefer tools offered through the school’s existing Google or Microsoft agreements, or tools that have passed your app approval process.

Support teachers too

Teachers need guidance as much as students. Cover:

• What teachers may use AI for, such as drafting materials, example answers or differentiated texts.
• That teachers stay responsible for checking anything AI produces before it reaches students.
• That AI must not make decisions about students, such as grades or behaviour sanctions, on its own.

Short training sessions where teachers share what has worked in their subject are usually more useful than a long document.

Keep it short and review it often

AI tools change quickly. Keep the policy to two pages, publish it to staff, students and families, and review it every year. Ask teachers and students what’s working, and update the examples. A policy people have read and understood beats a thorough one nobody follows.